By Hussain Ehsani, July 7, 2026
Before October 7, 2023, it was difficult to imagine that terrorism’s impact would extend so visibly to Canada, with shootings, violent attacks, threats, and intimidation increasingly targeting Jewish institutions and communities.
However, the Hamas terror attacks on Israel nearly three years ago have emboldened antisemitic elements in Canada, with throngs of pro-Palestinian agitators and other extremists routinely gathering to harass and harm Jewish Canadians with increasing frequency and visibility.
The unprecedented wave of attacks, threats, and hate-motivated incidents targeting the Jewish community, Israeli institutions, and American interests in Canada demonstrates that the impact of terrorism is not limited to direct physical damage to these institutions. These actions also aim to create fear, weaken social cohesion, and challenge public confidence in the ability of the state and/or law enforcement to protect society.
This strategy has been widely used by global jihadist networks. Groups such as al-Qaeda in Iraq between 2003 and 2007 and the Islamic State of Khorasan Province (ISKP) in Afghanistan between 2015 and 2020 used repeated attacks to create insecurity, undermine public trust, and increase skepticism toward government institutions.
Extremist violence in Canada has involved actors from different ideological backgrounds. While Sunni jihadist organizations have historically represented a major global security concern, other extremist networks and actors have also demonstrated the ability to create security challenges. The case of Mohammad Baqer al-Saadi, linked to Kata’ib Hezbollah (KH), an Iran-backed Iraqi Shia militia group, illustrates how transnational ideological conflicts can influence security threats beyond the Middle East.
The series of shootings, threats against Jewish institutions, firebombing, and arson incidents targeting synagogues and attacks against diplomatic facilities such as the United States Consulate in Toronto demonstrate a broader strategy: transforming isolated incidents into a continuous atmosphere of fear. This reflects what security scholars describe as the strategic effect of terrorism: the ability of terrorism to produce political and psychological consequences that are much greater than the immediate physical damage.
According to the experience of jihadist organizations, in particular al-Qaeda in Iraq, this strategy often develops through several tactics:
Transforming isolated attacks into a pattern of permanent insecurity
Jihadist groups often begin with limited attacks against symbolic targets that may not immediately create a national response or nationwide condemnation. However, repeated attacks gradually increase public anxiety and create the perception that the threat is permanent.
For example, attacks against Jewish communities can later expand toward broader targets. The purpose at this stage is not only to cause physical harm but also to create a persistent psychological impact among members of the targeted community. The ultimate objective is to make fear become part of daily life.
Using ideological narratives to justify violence
Terrorist organizations frequently attach political or ideological narratives to their actions. These narratives attempt to present attacks as a response, retaliation, or defense against activities that are taking place in other parts of the world. Al-Qaeda in Iraq repeatedly justified its violence by claiming that attacks were a reaction to the presence of foreign forces in Iraq. Similar narratives have appeared after attacks against Jewish institutions in different countries, where pro-Jihadist actors have attempted to justify attacks against Jewish communities based on Israel’s counterterrorism actions in Gaza.
In a recent case, Mohammad Bagher al-Saadi stated that attacks in Toronto on the US Consulate, the Shaarei Shomayim synagogue, and the Bayt, a Jewish community hub, were in retaliation for the war against Iran. He also claimed the attacks were in retribution for the death of Qasem Soleimani, a former commander of the IRGC Quds Force (QF), and Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, a former Iraqi paramilitary leader and chief of staff of Iraq’s Hash al-Sha’abi (Popular Mobilization Forces, or PMF), who were killed in a US air strike on January 3, 2020. The purpose of these narratives is to provide ideological justification, attract supporters, and frame terrorism as a necessary response rather than an act of violence.
Normalization of violence and expansion of targets
When attacks continue without a strong response from security institutions, extremist groups may interpret this as an opportunity to expand their activities. A lack of effective prevention can encourage lower-level members or supporters by creating the perception that attacks can happen without serious consequences. Consequently, they will expand their area of operation to other communities or areas.
This pattern has appeared in previous conflicts. Al-Qaeda in Iraq expanded its attacks from Shia communities toward broader civilian targets in the Sunni community. For instance, the assassination of prominent Sheikh Abdul Sattar Abu Risha from the Sunni population of Iraq in September 2007 can be analyzed in this regard. Similarly, ISKP expanded its attacks from targeting the Hazara community toward other religious and social groups, including Sufi communities in Afghanistan after 2020.
Erosion of public trust in the state and security institutions
Terrorism’s long-term strategic objective is often the weakening of public confidence in government institutions. It does not require the destruction of a state or an organization physically to achieve its goals. The case of Harakat Ashab al-Yamin al-Islamiya” (the Islamic Movement of the Companions of the Right Hand), al-Saadi’s group in Europe and Canada, proves this. Even though the group’s HAYI attacks in Europe or Canada resulted in no casualties, it succeeded in its goals by “sow[ing] fear and confusion” while also signalling Iran’s ability to operate in the West without consequences.
The statements attributed to al-Saadi — who sought help for additional attacks while he was running multiple teams — reflect an attempt to maintain psychological pressure beyond the individual attack itself. Terrorists understand very well that governments that can’t protect their people are ultimately powerless.
The danger for Canada
Al-Saadi’s contents on his phone indicates that the purpose of the attack was to wage “psychological warfare” to “install fear and terror in civilians.” This, in essence, is the strategic effect of terrorism: creating political and psychological chaos that terrorizes societies, weakens trust, and generates instability.
Although recent attacks and threats in Canada have often targeted the Jewish community, the broader objective of insurgency actors is not limited to one group. The ultimate target is social stability itself.
Canada’s challenge is therefore not only responding to individual attacks but preventing the creation of a wider environment of fear, insecurity, and declining public trust. The strategic effect of terrorism is achieved when society begins to believe that violence is unavoidable.
Hussain Ehsani is a Middle East affairs analyst with expertise on the Islamic State and al-Qaeda in Iraq and Afghanistan.
